No products in the cart.
Federal Court Boot Camp (17th Annual): The Nuts and Bolts (CA) [Two-Part Webinar]
Audio program! (check our CLE Programs page for live versions)
Pincus Professional Education has put on its annual Federal Court Boot Camp for seventeen years for a reason – it’s that good.
Large law firms like Manatt send multiple associates to the program year after year why? Because it’s that good.
Small and mid-sized firms send their new associates each year as well. Why? Because it’s that good.
Solo attorneys who have heard from others about the program come why? Because it’s that good.
Our Federal Court Boot Camp has taught thousands of attorneys about the ins-and-outs of Federal Court, as well as general litigation strategies and skills. This seminar is both a litigation primer and a primer for litigating in Federal Court.
It is taught by Federal Court Magistrate and Federal District Court judges, very experienced litigators, and 25+ year career federal law clerks. You’ll get a unique perspective and an inside look at what the court wants and does not want from attorneys practicing in Federal Court.
Attendees have rated our faculty so highly that most of the faculty return to teach year after year (and some have taught every single year).
This litigation course will walk you through the essential components and tasks involved in your case, from start to finish. You’ll learn the rules and tasks, strategies and tactics, and the skills and techniques you must have to become a more effective and successful litigator in Federal Court and to be a more effective and successful litigator in general.
Take a look at our “testimonials” tab for how valuable attendees feel it is to hear from judges, career District Court law clerks and experienced litigators.
And take a look at our detailed agenda to see why our Federal Court Boot Camp program is the best in the state.
This is a newer attorney level program and is great for all types of attorney: Large firm, small firm, solo, government and legal aid.
Can’t attend? This program will be recorded live. The recorded package, available in audio or video format and including seminar materials, will be available approximately three weeks after the live program ends.
If you would also like to learn more about taking and defending depositions, our How to Master the Deposition recording is available.
Have you ever thought about improving your public speaking skills? Now is the time! Get Faith Pincus’ newly published book Being Heard: Presentation Skills for Attorneys, from the ABA now (ABA members receive 10%-20% off). You can order a signed paperback from us at a discount here (free shipping). It is also available on Amazon in Kindle and paperback versions.
Part 1: Tuesday, May 25
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. (includes a break)
1:00 – 1:40
Intro to program and Federal Court
- Practical Differences Between State Court and Federal Court Practice
- Material Differences Among California’s Federal Districts
- Highlights from the Local Rules and Local Practice
- Rule 1
1:40 – 2:30
Complaint and Answer Rules, Differences, Advice and Strategies
- Plausibility Standard: Rule 8’s Short and Plain Statement
- Forms of Complaints and Answers/Defenses
- Defenses vs. Affirmative Defenses
- Practice Pointers and Pitfalls
- Rule 16.1
- Case Management Reports
2:30 – 2:40
10 Min Break
2:40 – 3:25
Rule 12 and Other Motions
- Top ten tips for drafting Rule 12(b)(6) motions, responses, and replies.
- How to enhance the effectiveness of memoranda addressing motions to dismiss.
- How to address procedural issues that frequently arise when briefing motions to dismiss.
- Additional Rule 12 motions
- Ex Parte Motions
- TRO or preliminary injunctions;
3:25 – 4:30
Discovery & eDiscovery
- CM/ECF brief overview/advice
- Interrogatories, request to produce
- 2015 Amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure
- Scope of discovery / proportionality
- Requests for production and responses
- Failure to preserve / sanctions
- How courts have interpreted them
- Overview and considerations
- Sources and preservation
- Federal Rule of Evidence 502
4:30 – 4:45
Motion/Oral Argument Tips, including online arguments
Part 2: Thursday, May 27
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. (includes a break)
1:00 – 2:00
- Online depos
- Federal v. State differences
- Subpoenas & affidavits
- Strategy and Deciding whom to depose
- Taking good depositions
- Making effective use of depositions at trial or for settlement
2:00 – 2:55
Drafting and Replying to Motions for Summary Judgment
2:55 – 3:05
10 min break
- Trial Briefs
- Pretrial Statement
- Pretrial Conference and Order (FRCP 16)
- Your Jury:
- What is unique about Jury Selection in Federal Court?
- Questionnaire and Voir Dire Tips
- Jury Instructions in Federal Court
- Jury Verdict Forms in Federal Court
- Motions in Limine – including how do they differ from state court?
- Client and Witness Prep
3:55 – 4:45
- Introduction of Exhibits
- Evidentiary Objections
- Direct and Cross-Examinations
- Purpose, audience and format requirements
- Basic direct examination skills
- Basic cross examination skills
- Preserving the Record for Appeal
Part 1: Tuesday, May 25
Part 2: Thursday, May 27
Times for both sessions:
1:00 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. Pacific Time
We will send your login details and handout materials a few days before your program.
“Excellent! Will be back! Everyone was great!” – David A. Wolf, Esq.
“Completely satisfied. This was outstanding!” – Nancy Woods, Esq.
“It was a great refresher on the federal rules and the panelists had great anecdotes from personal experience. My federal practice is heating up so a refresher was needed.” – Page Allinson, Esq.
“Great to hear insights from judges and experienced practitioners, and a very experienced law clerk with private practice experience. The Q& A sessions were great to hear.” – Tracy Woo, Esq.
“Invaluable to have the judge’s advice and opinions.” – Genevieve Coyle, Esq.
“It was a really good seminar. Very good. Thank you. It provided me very valuable assistance with the Rule 16 and 26 issues.” – Olivia Bissell, Esq.
“Great program! Very informative and interesting. Looking forward to future seminars.” – Iveta Ovsepyan, Esq.
“I enjoyed the practical nature of the presentation and the back and forth discussion. The panel put together was an excellent combination of different experiences. I loved hearing from the Judges, who were both practitioners, the clerk who generally deals with the various motions, and the various attorneys from both sides plaintiff and defense.” – Cynthia D. Vargas, Esq.
“I am a new lawyer. This was a great course to help put many things in focus. Gave me great advice.” – Jeshawna R. Harrell, Esq.
“Great program! Really informative!” – Deborah Gettleman, Esq.
“Very good program.” – Lee W. Tower, Esq.
“Great outlines for future reference. Concise presentation format. Very well done. Knowledgeable speakers.” – Michael Caballero, Esq.
“I am fully satisfied. This was a great primer for practicing in Federal Court. This was one of the best seminars that I’ve been to in my 13 years of practicing law. It makes me want to never go to state court ever again.” – Richard Jefferson, Esq.
“I didn’t know much about federal civil practice, so it was nice to get a start to finish overview. It wasn’t overwhelming. It was a good procedural overview with practical tips.” – Kree D. Filer, Esq.
“Loved it!” – Jugpreet Mann, Esq.
“Great to hear the perspective of a clerk. I found the voire dire tips to be very helpful. Loved the 8 components for opening statement and the points on evidence and cross-examination.” – Michelle Rahban, Esq.
“This is a great survey course regarding differences between state and federal court. Judge Olguin’s comments always included practical advice that is extremely helpful and adds to the topics substantially. He is great. Judge Segal had the best, most substantive interjections. I’d go to any discussions or lectures led by her. Excellent!” – Grace Lau, Esq.
“A very good program. All the speakers were helpful and informative.” – Richard Stoll, Esq.
“Very helpful and instructive.” – Gregory Yu, Esq.
“Great refresher course and helpful practical advice.” – Matthew Peters, Esq.
“Presentation was well-done and informative. The insights of the panel members was enlightening.” – Joseph A. Gordon, Esq.
“As a mother and a lawyer, I felt very respected and valued by Pincus. The rallying cry for equality for women is ‘The future is female.’ Well, that future looks like the way Venus and Grace treat your customers.” – Maha Ibrahim, Esq.
“Good recap of basics of federal practice with useful pointers. Proper depth given the breadth of subjects.” – Matthew Roman, Esq.
“Very good speakers.” – Susan Horst, Esq.
“Well done, head to toe.” – John Cammack, Esq.
“This was a well-done presentation. Very informative.” – Philip John Downs Jr, Esq.
“The entire panel did a great job and delivered well.” Tom Borchard, Esq.
“I was very satisfied!” Courtney Arbucci, Esq.
“Highly satisfied. Hearing from multiple clerks was helpful.” – Tim O’Connor, Esq.
“Very satisfied – gave me what I wanted. Basic info with strategic uses.” – Joseph Charles, Esq.
“Very good, candid advice.” – Daniel Zarchy, Esq.
“Great job. Very informative and well presented.” – Jonathan T. Dawson, Esq.
“I really enjoyed the program and the speakers. Having a judicial clerk was also extremely valuable.” – Dana Ulise, Esq.
“The panelists covered every important topic in-depth. Thank you for having this seminar!” – Ari Kaufman, Esq.
“Great speakers. I thoroughly enjoyed the information.” – Marty Nicholson, Esq.
“Excellent.” – Megan Irish, Esq.
“Very practical information. Very helpful for negotiating the federal arena.” – Helene Friedman, Esq.
“A great primer for both new and experienced attorneys.” – Peter Ton, Esq.
“Great CLE.” – James Howard, Esq.
“This was one of the most interesting, helpful and useful MCLE programs I have ever attended! Good coverage of practical topics.” – Harvie Schrieber, Esq.
“Great presentation! Very informative!” – Kari Martin Higgins, Esq.
“Great information, very helpful.” – Oianka McElmurry, Esq.
“Good review and run-down of the issues.” – Daniel Marsh, Esq.
“What a great concept to have the clerks conduct the seminar! So informative!” – Neyleen Beljajev, Esq.
“All the faculty were top notch – very professional and informative and competent.” – Paul Carreras, Esq.
“Good information regarding the different FRCP. Very Satisfied.” – Michelle J. Smythe, Esq.
“This was a good re-introduction; Very informative and insightful for someone looking to learn the ins & outs of Federal Court.” – Eric Wills, Esq.
“I was very pleased with this program. It is definitely worth the money and travel!” – Christina Milligan
“Important subject for practitioners in Federal Court. Good topic, good speakers.” – D. David Steele, Esq.
“Very enjoyable and knowledgeable seminar! Thank you!” – Aman A. Lal, Esq.
“Very good.” – Jana Will
“Excellent program.” – Kori Macksoud, Esq.
“The speakers were good at recognizing the variety of lawyers in the audience.” – Phyra McCandless, Esq.
“Another very thorough crash-course put on by Pincus. Very helpful!”
“I’m new to Federal Court. This program offered a good introduction.” – Katherine Broderick, Esq.
“I think the program was very informative and well put together. It was also nice to have everyone’s perspectives on various topics. I think the course was very thorough. I really appreciated more of the practical tips.”
“I found the program very helpful as an overview to litigation and many of the topics discussed have application in state court as well.”
“I thought the program was really interesting–especially the first part of the day. I really enjoyed hearing from Judge Corley and from Plaintiffs’ side firms. I also found the tips to be very helpful. It was a good overview of material.”
“I am no longer afraid to practice in federal court.”
“Great mix of judges, clerks, and practitioners.”
“Judge Segal’s input to the panel’s advice was always welcome and appreciated. Laurie Smith consistently and effectively provided insightful remarks throughout the day. She’s an excellent panelist.”
“Appreciate that everything advertised is what I got.”
“Thank you. Another excellent program.”
“Very informative and practical advice; good for new lawyers.”
“I practice in federal court regularly and was hoping to get some practice tips to improve my representation and also to confirm or correct the lessons I have learned in practice – the program did exactly that.”
“If this faculty is an example of Pincus, I’ll always attend. Great work!”
“Very helpful! Materials are nice.”
“Speakers were knowledgeable and relatable. Very informative.”
“Good insight. Good comments.”
“I found this a very helpful nuts and bolts for new attorneys.”
“The information was helpful and the materials (checklists in particular) will be useful here on out.”
“Outlines were extremely effective.”
“Best CLE course I have ever attended!”
“I enjoyed the individual tips, stories & examples – makes it easier to remember procedures.”
“Great program. Law clerks’ views are most valuable.”
“Appreciated the FRCP updates: this was the best part of the program.”
“I practice class action law, so I enjoyed hearing about the speaker’s experience.”
“All excellent speakers – both in content and delivery.”
“Very happy. Not many CLE’s specialize in federal law. I wish I had taken this course earlier!”
“Each speaker gave great examples…and I appreciated the fact that there were attorneys representing the plaintiff side and the defense side. I appreciated the insight of both judges. It was great to have them attend! This is a great seminar for Federal Court beginners or a refresher for seasoned veterans in Federal Court.” – Nicole Dennewitz, Paralegal
“Motions presentation was worth the entire price. Humor works! Anecdotes were great!”
“Great Job! An excellent course. Informative presentations!”
“Very good – no boring, droning lecturing. Kept me engaged throughout. Women and a diverse panel – yay! Thanks for a great program.”
“Very good program – the law clerk perspective should be heard by all lawyers.”
“Great practical advice.”
“I most appreciated comments from judges and law clerks of federal courts as to insights of inner workings.”
“Excellent balance of substantive information, personal observations & idiosyncrasies of bench potentially relevant to practitioners.”
“The program was good.” – Bethany Burrill, Esq.
“I learned more about federal court civil procedure than any other class I have taken.”
“Liked the updates regarding the current situation.”
Hon. Jacqueline Scott Corley
United States District Court, Northern District of California
Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Scott Corley has presided over a variety of civil cases at all stages of the proceedings, from motions to dismiss through jury trial. She has also served as a settlement judge in nearly every type of federal litigation.
Just prior to her 2011 appointment to the Court, Judge Corley was a partner at Kerr & Wagstaffe, LLP in San Francisco as a civil litigator with an emphasis on federal practice. She represented individuals, government entities, and institutions as plaintiffs and defendants in a variety of matters that included trademark, copyright, patent, constitutional law, defamation, malicious prosecution, class actions, contract and probate.
From 1998 through 2009 Judge Corley served as a career law clerk to the Honorable Charles R. Breyer. She also served on the Northern District of California Alternative Dispute Resolution mediation and early neutral evaluation panels from 2006 through her appointment.
Judge Corley received her undergraduate degree from U.C. Berkeley, and her J.D. from Harvard Law School, magna cum laude, where she was an editor and Articles Chair of the Harvard Law Review. Upon graduation, she served as a law clerk to the Honorable Robert E. Keeton of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. She then practiced complex commercial litigation and white collar criminal defense at Goodwin, Procter LLP in Boston and was a litigation associate at Coblentz, Patch, Duffy & Bass LLP in San Francisco before joining Judge Breyer in 1998.
Hon. Fernando Olguin
United States District Court, Central District of California
Judge Olguin began his legal career in 1989 as a judicial law clerk for a federal judge in the District of Arizona. In 1991, he was selected to be a member of the United States Attorney General’s Honors Program, where he worked in the Civil Rights Division of the United States Department of Justice. After leaving the Department of Justice in 1994, Judge Olguin joined the Mexican-American Legal Defense and Educational Fund (“MALDEF”) as the National Director of the Education Program. In 1995, Judge Olguin became a name partner in the Pasadena-based law firm, Traber, Voorhees & Olguin, a firm that litigated housing and employment cases.
Judge Olguin was appointed to serve as a United States Magistrate Judge in 2001. In December 2012, Judge Olguin was confirmed as a United States District Judge. He maintains his chambers in Los Angeles.
Hon. Karen Stevenson
United States District Court, Central District of California
Hon. Karen L. Stevenson is a U.S. Magistrate Judge in the Central District of California. Before her appointment to the bench on August 10, 2015, Judge Stevenson was Of Counsel with Buchalter Nemer, where she specialized in complex business litigation and insurance defense. During her career as a litigator and trial lawyer, she was a frequent speaker on e-discovery and data security. A member of the L.A. County Bar Association Litigation Section Executive Committee, she is also a former Editor-in-Chief of the American Bar Association’s Section of Litigation, Litigation News publications. In 2015, Ms. Stevenson was named by Savoy Magazine as one of nation’s most influential Black attorneys. She received her J.D. from Stanford Law School (with distinction), an M.A. in European History from Oxford University, England where she was a Rhodes Scholar, and is Phi Beta Kappa graduate of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
Patrick Hammon, Esq.
Mr. Hammon has served on seven trial teams and has participated in several mediations. He has extensive experience serving as the client interface in managing discovery and preparing witnesses for deposition and trial.
He was recognized in 2018 as one of Silicon Valley Business Journal’s “40 Under 40,” an annual list of “up and coming leaders in Silicon Valley who have distinguished themselves in their fields.”
Mr. Hammon was appointed by the Board of Trustees of the State Bar of California to serve as a member of the 2018 Commission on Judicial Nominees Evaluation. The commission assists California’s governor in the judicial selection process by providing independent evaluations of candidates for judicial appointment and nomination.
He is active in several Bay Area nonprofits, including Christmas in the Park and the Silicon Valley Urban Debate League. He also serves on the Palo Alto Hiring and Summer Associate Committees and mentors junior associates as part of the Firm’s Mentor Program.
Meghan F. Loisel, Esq.
Ms. Loisel advocates on behalf of employees in individual and class action litigation in a range of employment matters. She has experience with discrimination, harassment, retaliation, failure to accommodate, and constitutional claims.
Before joining Rudy, Exelrod, Zieff & Lowe LLP, Ms. Loisel was a deputy county counsel for Santa Clara County. She defended the County and its employees in employment, civil rights, and tort cases. She also litigated complex affirmative cases on behalf of the County and the People of the State of California, and was a member of the trial team who litigated a public nuisance action against former lead paint manufacturers, People v. Atlantic Richfield Company. Ms. Loisel also litigated civil rights cases as a fellow at the American Civil Liberties Union’s Reproductive Freedom Project in New York City.
Ms. Loisel graduated from New York University School of Law where she was the symposium editor for the Review of Law and Social Change. During law school, she worked as a law clerk for the Legal Aid Society Employment Law Center and the Bronx Defenders. Ms. Loisel received her undergraduate degree in History and Government from the University of Texas at Austin.
Chaya Mandelbaum, Esq.
Rudy, Exelrod, Zieff & Lowe, LLP
Chaya Mandelbaum is a Partner at Rudy, Exelrod, Zieff & Lowe, LLP where he represents employees in individual and class action litigation and negotiations across the spectrum of employment law. He has extensive experience in wage and hour, discrimination, retaliation, harassment and leave of absence matters.
Mr. Mandelbaum also serves as Chair of the California Fair Employment and Housing Council. He was appointed to the position by California Governor Edmund G. Brown, Jr. and his appointment was confirmed by the California Senate. The Council promulgates regulations related to employment and housing discrimination. It also holds hearings on civil rights issues confronting the state.
Mr. Mandelbaum is a Contributing Editor of The Rutter Group’s California Practice Guide: Employment Litigation and is a Co-Author of the Employment Law chapter of The Recorder’s California Business Litigation book. He previously served as a Member of the Executive Committee of the State Bar of California’s Labor and Employment Law Section.
Before joining Rudy, Exelrod, Zieff & Lowe, Mr. Mandelbaum was a Senior Litigation Counsel at Sanford Heisler. At Sanford Heisler, he represented employees in class actions involving wage and hour, discrimination and other civil rights claims.
Previously, Mr. Mandelbaum was a Trial Attorney in the Office of the Solicitor for the United States Department of Labor. In that capacity, he successfully represented the Secretary of Labor in numerous significant enforcement actions, including a multi-million dollar wage and penalty recovery based on violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. He obtained successful results in both jury and bench trials during his tenure. As a result, Mr. Mandelbaum was a recipient of the 2011 Federal Executive Board’s Service Award and the 2011 Secretary of Labor’s Exceptional Achievement Award.
Prior to his tenure at the Department of Labor, Mr. Mandelbaum worked in the Labor and Employment Practice Group at Morgan Lewis & Bockius, where he represented employers in matters involving wage and hour, employment discrimination and labor relations.
Mr. Mandelbaum is a graduate, cum laude, of the University of Michigan Law School. He received his undergraduate education at the University of California, San Diego.
Elizabeth McCloskey, Esq.
Keker, Van Nest & Peters LLP
Elizabeth McCloskey specializes in high-stakes complex litigation, including white-collar criminal defense and bet-the company commercial disputes. She has successfully represented individuals and corporations in federal and state courts, and in complex investigations brought by the U.S. Department of Justice, California Attorney General, and other government agencies.
Ms. McCloskey has tried multiple cases to verdict. She obtained a complete defense verdict on behalf of Arista Networks in a high-profile copyright and patent trial against Cisco Systems. Recently, she represented the former CEO of Bumble Bee Foods in a five-week criminal antitrust trial.
Currently, Ms. McCloskey represents Lyft in actions brought by the California Attorney General and Labor Commissioner, addressing issues critical to the “sharing” economy: whether drivers have been misclassified as independent contractors rather than employees. She is defending Commercial Real Estate Exchange, Inc. (CREXI), a fast-growing commercial real estate marketplace, against a copyright and unfair competition lawsuit brought by a competitor. Previously, Ms. McCloskey represented Tour de France winning cyclist Lance Armstrong against a False Claims Act case brought by a former teammate and joined by the United States.
Ms. McCloskey earned her J.D. from U.C. Berkeley School of Law (Order of the Coif) and B.A. in Government and English from Georgetown University (cum laude). She clerked for Judge Valerie Baker Fairbank of the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California and Judge John T. Noonan Jr. of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Before attending law school, Ms. McCloskey worked as a journalist.
Justin Jones Rodriguez, Esq.
Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP
Justin Jones Rodriguez represents managed healthcare plans and insurance companies in complex cases in both state and federal courts. Justin’s practice focuses on handling class actions, ERISA litigation and bad-faith denial of benefits suits. He also has significant experience handling high-stakes reimbursement disputes.
In addition to his healthcare litigation practice, Justin has extensive experience defending companies in private litigation, government investigations, and enforcement actions involving unfair competition, false advertising and other consumer protection matters. In California, Justin defends companies against claims under the Unfair Competition Law, the False Advertising Law, the Automatic Renewal Law and other consumer protection statutes.
Justin also represents clients on a pro bono basis in cases that advance the civil rights of LGBTQ people. Justin’s pro bono work includes impact litigation and defensive asylum work, primarily on behalf of LGBTQ clients and other underserved communities.
Prior to joining Manatt, Justin was a schoolteacher. He taught public speaking, communications studies and argumentation to students at the middle school through university levels. During law school, he served as a judicial extern to the Honorable Kim McLane Wardlaw in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit and as a law clerk to the Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund.
Laurie E. Smith, Esq.
Career Law Clerk
U.S. District Court, Central District of California
Laurie Smith is a career law clerk for the Honorable John F. Walter, U.S. District Court Judge for the Central District of California. Prior to that, Ms. Smith litigated at several law firms in Northern and Southern California. Ms. Smith served as Managing Editor for the Virginia Tax Review Law Journal and is a 1996 graduate of the University of Virginia School of Law.
Bart Williams, Esq.
Bart Williams is one of the nation’s most sought after trial lawyers and commercial litigators. He has served as lead counsel for numerous companies in bet-the-company litigation. Bart has served as a counselor and trial lawyer for many Fortune 500 corporations in a variety of industries, including: media and entertainment, financial services, consumer products, telecommunications and technology, pharmaceutical, and private equity.
He has represented multiple major law firms in their most serious legal malpractice cases. He has also represented celebrities, government officials and corporate executives individually in high-stakes matters. Bart’s background as a former Assistant United States Attorney has also helped establish him as a “go to” lawyer for internal corporate investigations and white collar criminal defense matters.
A member of the American College of Trial Lawyers, Bart has compiled an impressive list of victories in jury and bench trials throughout the United States [View Matters List below]. He has been featured in numerous publications such as Law360, The American Lawyer, Black Enterprise, Chambers USA and the Daily Journal, which has repeatedly named him one of the top 100 lawyers in the State of California. In 2018, both Benchmark Litigation and Chambers and Partners named him as a finalist for National Trial Lawyer of the Year.
A leader within Proskauer, Bart is a member of the firm’s seven-member Executive Committee and also serves as head of Proskauer’s Los Angeles office.
Bart served as an assistant U.S. Attorney in the Central District of California where he concentrated on complex criminal prosecutions involving allegations of fraud or other business crimes. He obtained convictions in 11 out of 11 jury trials. He received several special commendations during his tenure, including one from the Honorable Louis J. Freeh, then-director of the FBI.
Bart is a graduate of Yale College and Yale Law School. He was a starting guard for four years on the Yale Varsity Basketball Team, and received the George McReynolds Award as the team’s Most Valuable Defensive Player his senior year.
Registration fees are per person.
Group: $399 per person for 2 or more from the same company pre-registering at the same time
Government employee/Legal Aid* Rate: $375
Law Student*/Paralegal Rate: $275
*Your discount is automatically applied at check out.
Your access information and course handout will be sent out a few days before the program.
Registration includes an electronic copy (.pdf) of your seminar handbook. This will be emailed to you a few days before the program. Be sure to check your spam folder if you don’t see it by then. Please put firstname.lastname@example.org in your address book to make sure you receive your pdf of the program handbook.
* Law Student Rate is for current law students only. Please bring your law school ID to show when you check in for the program.
** Legal Aid attorneys are those attorneys employed by Legal Aid/non-profit firms. It does not include attorneys who have their own practice, or are employed by law firms, that volunteer their time for non-profit causes or take on pro-bono cases. It also does not include attorneys who serve on non-profit boards.
Full and partial scholarships may be available to a limited number of Legal Aid attorneys, based upon registration. Please call (877) 858-3848 to discuss or email your request to email@example.com.
This program is available for both Self-Study and Participatory CLE.*
CA General: This program is approved for 7.0 units of general CLE in California.
NY General: This course is eligible for approval, under New York’s CLE Approved Jurisdiction policy, for 7.0 CLE units. Pincus Professional Education is a CA Accredited Provider, which is a NY approved jurisdiction. See Section 6 of the New York State CLE Board Regulations and Guidelines for further information.
*Participatory CLE: For those states that make a distinction between self-study and Participatory CLE (CA, IL, NY), please write down the Verification Codes read out during the program by speakers or our announcer and email them to us at firstname.lastname@example.org and we will issue your Participatory CLE certificate.
Self-Study CLE certificates are available for states that do not require verification codes.
This program is approved for CLE in the states listed above. Upon request, Pincus Pro Ed will provide any information an attorney needs to support their application for CLE approval in other states other than what is listed above. Many attorneys ask for this and are approved in other states.